The NPSL supports clubs actions in filing a claim with the Court of arbitration, to force the the US Soccer federation to accept the FIFA mandate to all federations to maintain promotion & relegation across all divisions in US Soccer. http://www.npsl.com/...?referrer_id=1510764

Recently listened to Christopher Harris's (World Soccer Talk) podcast on this subject. My opinion is that US sports franchise owners have too much money to agree to relegation and their backers wouldn't like it either if they see that they will lose money. A very interesting podcast in which goes on to say that the locked system in the US will drive fans away from the MLS and towards lower league where they can support their local team and not a franchised team from a major city that might be 100's of miles away.

Interesting development. I agree about the franchise owners but don't understand the point about driving fans away from MLS. Clubs don't have fans who travel hundred of miles so I don't see how they can lose them, plus franchises are awarded to clubs who are likely to have a decent fan base in their locality in the first place. Also clubs over there are so thinly spread over large distances that you can't just drop watching top flight soccer for a local alternative....because often there isn't a local alternative! Not at any meaningful level, anyway.

On the podcast they mentioned that the fee for being in MLS is $150 million. There is only so far they can expand before they hit the ceiling, I that appears to be getting close. After that where does the money come from? The discussion is worth listening to and they do mention that MLS teams do seem to have reached the peak of their core fan base and floating fans seem to be spending their money on one or two big ICC matches then watching MLS on TV. Any games they attend are them lower league games as these are more affordable.

Yes interesting statement from tier 2 Miami F C of the NASL & tier 3 at moment Kingston Stockade of the NPSL ( as there is a gap at tier 3 currently) . This gap should be filled in 2018 by a new NISA League leaving Kingston at tier 4.

Below the MLS is a massive gulf to the next leagues down the pecking order. In the MLS I saw Atlanta at home in July and they had 44,974 spectators. Others I went , Montreal = 18,707 , Philly Union = 16,143 & Orlando City = 25,029.

Of the current tier 2 set ups the NASL & the USL I visited 1 in each , Tampa in the USL drew 6,269 and Puerto Rico drew 2,876.

Below tier 2 and you have the USL full of reserve and affiliated teams the PDSL an U23 league in the main and the NPSL.

The point I am attempting to make is I cant see promotion / relegation working because of the gulf between all tiers and the money needed to progress upwards.

The NPSL supports clubs actions in filing a claim with the Court of arbitration, to force the the US Soccer federation to accept the FIFA mandate to all federations to maintain promotion & relegation across all divisions in US Soccer. http://www.npsl.com/...?referrer_id=1510764

I think Kingston Stockade FC and Miami FC would be well advised to save their money on a court fight over this issue. MLS owners, whether they are individual ones or part of an ownership group, will resist any attempts at a promotion/relegation system in the U.S. Canada may have a different perspective on this, but it is supposed to launch the Canadian Premier League in 2018. The goal for CPL is to establish itself after a few years, then possibly institute a promotion and relegation system.

The three MLS teams in Canada will be against efforts to have its league adopt such a system. There has been speculation that once the CPL is established and determined to be viable, that Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver would then leave MLS and make it an exclusive USA professional soccer league. Some fans on both sides of the border seem to be in favor of this plan, but I think it will be a very long time before it happens, just like a promotion-relegation system in the U.S.

When Toronto was awarded a franchise and began play in 2007, I think it cost $50 million for the expansion fee. Getting $150 million just 10 years later is astounding (and excessive to me, for that matter). I agree with previous posts on this subject about how wide the gap is in terms of level of play between MLS and the lower divisions. Very few teams in any of these leagues average more than 10,000 fans per contest. FC Cincinnati and Sacramento Republic are the noticeable exceptions. Having great fan support helps, but MLS wants potential new teams coming into its league to have an acceptable place to play, or plans to construct a stadium for the new teams.

As for this FIFA "mandate", is this really true? Is it a mandate or a recommendation? I seem to recall a few years ago when Sepp Blatter was FIFA President, that he and some of his cohorts were in favor of leagues across the world limiting their top flight pro leagues to 18 teams, so as to free up a few more dates for international competition. Italy, France, England, and Spain must have missed that memo, right?

Many leagues throughout the world use to suffer from the lesser quality of second tier leagues and teams which usually led to promoted teams struggling and returning back to the second tier after 1 season. Things seem to have improved lately with the gap between top and second tiers narrowing across leagues. This could be because owners of second tiers teams are spending more on players and coaches. This means that a second tier side is better prepared to compete in a top tier league but it does bring with it financial issues.

I would expect the US to be in the same position, with increase spending by teams either trying to maintain the top tier status and lower league teams wanting to move up the league system. Current MLS owners stand to lose a lot of money from relegation and this would stop promotion/relegation to the MLS from happening.There is also the draft system which is used in the US, i don't think this type of system is used in any other league in the world where there is a multi tier league system with promotion & relegation in place.

Yes interesting statement from tier 2 Miami F C of the NASL & tier 3 at moment Kingston Stockade of the NPSL ( as there is a gap at tier 3 currently) . This gap should be filled in 2018 by a new NISA League leaving Kingston at tier 4.

Below the MLS is a massive gulf to the next leagues down the pecking order. In the MLS I saw Atlanta at home in July and they had 44,974 spectators. Others I went , Montreal = 18,707 , Philly Union = 16,143 & Orlando City = 25,029.

Of the current tier 2 set ups the NASL & the USL I visited 1 in each , Tampa in the USL drew 6,269 and Puerto Rico drew 2,876.

Below tier 2 and you have the USL full of reserve and affiliated teams the PDSL an U23 league in the main and the NPSL.

The point I am attempting to make is I cant see promotion / relegation working because of the gulf between all tiers and the money needed to progress upwards.

The only way into the MSL is loads of $$$$$$.

It's potentially all a bit chicken and egg though. It could be that attendances in the NASL and USL are low because they don't have the opportunity of promotion.

Two of the reasons for low attendances in lower leagues in the U.S. is facilities and payroll. Smaller city teams play in much smaller venues than those in MLS. Some of these places are in college or high school football stadiums in which dimension length of the pitch is good, but the width is substandard. Nowadays, new NFL stadiums are being built with soccer in mind. Prior to 2010, the only new ones built to accommodate the minimum width required of a soccer pitch were Gillette Stadium in Foxboro (primary tenant is the New England Patriots) and CenturyLink Field in Seattle (home of the Seattle Seahawks). Since then, every new NFL stadium has been constructed as a dual purpose facility for both football and soccer.

Conversely, there are many college football stadiums that have large capacities, but the fields are too narrow for soccer. Many of these collegiate facilities date back to the 1920's and are difficult to re-furbish. For a team like the Charleston Battery of the USL, there's no other viable place for them to play their games other than Blackbaud Stadium which has a capacity of 6000. If there were a promotion/relegation system here, it's not financially feasible for teams to play at Blackbaud. MLS and Charleston would lose money, and there's no guarantee that more fans would show up to support the team if its stadium were doubled or tripled in size. From this perspective, market research would be useful in determining an area's interest in supporting a top-flight team. St. Louis has a rich history in producing American soccer talent. MLS wanted to put a franchise there, but there was no place for the team to play. An investor group came up with the money for the expansion fee and was going to put up most of the money for a new 25,000 seat stadium. But, they weren't willing or able to pay for the entire cost of construction for the new facility. So, the city decided to implement a tax increase to pay for its share of the cost, pending voter approval. Voters rejected the measure by about 3000 votes, so for the time being...no MLS team in St. Louis, while other cities pass it by.

Also, players in the USL make considerably less money than an MLS roster player who seldom sees any playing time. Even if a team plays in the most state-of-the-art facility, if it doesn't have money to pay its players to be competitive, fans will stay away if the product they're paying for is deemed inferior. From this standpoint, relegation would kill a lot of fan support for a team. As it is now, your team can be having a terrible season, but you know it will be back in 2018 playing in the same league against familiar foes, and hope springs eternal at the start of any season, right?

MLS also has a salary cap in place for its players. You don't see players signing huge contracts like you do at top teams in Europe. You won't get as rich playing in the U.S. or Canada, but you do get a chance to play in a competitive, parity-driven league where the fans are just as engaged and passionate about the sport as anywhere else in the world.

It is always assumed that promotion and relegation must involve leagues outside of MLS, but I don't see why this should be necessary. The next two rounds of expansion are scheduled to raise numbers to 28 teams, presumably in two regional conferences of 14. Why not have two merit-based divisions of 14 with the same scheduling practices as occur at present, namely, that teams still play against those in the other division, just not as often.

If you had Div 1 and Div 2, each of 14 teams, they could play the current 34 game season by playing 26 games within their division and then 8 more against teams in the other division but in their half of the country. I know 7 would be easier, as it would be half the number of teams, but the 8th game could be against a local rival, as happens at present.

You could still have Div 2 teams involved in the MLS Cup play-offs, you'd just bias the qualification towards Div 1 teams. For a 16-team bracket you could have the top 12 in Div 1, plus the top 4 in Div 2. Alternatively you could award the league championship to the Div 1 league leader, and have MLS Cup as a separate competition.

As an aside, I see NASL has been denied Division 2 status for next season: http://www.nasl.com/news/2017/09/05/nasl-issues-statement-on-us-soccer-sanctioning-decision-

Since MLS is awash with money, at least it should be with clubs having wealthy backers, then instead of a Western and Eastern Conference why not two or even three groups with an open draw pre season?

Travelling from the east coast to the west coast for a game can't be much different from travelling from the south coast to Canada for a game, other than the time difference? this might refresh MLS every season. Local games could also be included in the schedules if local rivals aren't drawn in the same groups.

To follow up on that, the scheduling isn't biased to save on travel but to emphasise local rivalries. The NY teams played each other three times each season (I think) because it's an obvious grudge match which creates more income than games against teams from the other side of the country.

To follow up on that, the scheduling isn't biased to save on travel but to emphasise local rivalries. The NY teams played each other three times each season (I think) because it's an obvious grudge match which creates more income than games against teams from the other side of the country.

That is why I stated that local derby games should be included in the schedules even if said teams were drawn in different groups.

What I see with MLS is staleness. Thinking back to the SPL when promotion was restrictive, it depended on many factors not just winning the league below the SPL, and with 1 promotion place up for grabs the SPL began to stagnate. If the structure of MLS means the same teams playing each other year after year, fans will become bored both going to the stadiums and watching on TV.

MLS would like to, but has never really succeeded in, creating a 'derby' culture as we would know it. Fans just don't travel to away games in big numbers. I don't know how intense, if at all, the NYC derby games are but, when I lived over there, Red Bulls v Philly or DC were the derbies closest to me. That meant a few hundred visiting fans (on a good day) rather then a few dozen. Also went to the Houston Dynamo v FC Dallas 'derby' (at the old Robertson stadium) - Dallas brought a hundred or so and there was no derby atmosphere as we'd recognise it.

Saying that, the Pacific North West is quite a footballing hotbed and a Portland - Seattle game is usually quite tasty.

Perhaps US cities don't have the rivalry you get with Liverpool & Manchester or Newcastle & Sunderland. These rivalries and derby games between teams from the same city have been built over a very long time, whereas US derby games like NYC & NY Red Bull is manufactured with little no history.

No it doesn't although attendances at regular season baseball games can get a little thin.

Yes, although they play 81 home games a season so I'm amazed they get as many as they do!

The NFL, on the other hand, has the highest average attendance of any sports league in the world. I believe this pattern follows on to TV exposure and merchandise sales.

The reason for this, as I far as I can see, is that the setup of the competition means that a far greater proportion of the teams are in with a shout of something each season. It may just be reaching the play-offs, but achievement is always relative. The equivalent in the Premier League is probably European qualification, where we can usually assign six of the seven places without even thinking about it.

I read a very interesting book about the history of the college football conferences which commented towards its end that 'soccer' may do a lot better than many people think because of the increased scrutiny on impact injuries. It will be interesting to see how things develop.